I guess I'm just a dummy.
Ok here's why I support a major party candidate (spoilers: O-bot) despite said candidates inability to spin cloth to gold:
(1) You can hardly expect either of the two major candidates to mirror your views on all issues. That doesn't make them evil choices.
(2) Throwing away every other issue over a pet issue seems like a bad idea. Obama mirrors my stance on many issues. Many of them I feel are vastly more important than internet privacy.
(3) The actual issue at hand is a lot more complex than the EFF party line lets on. The reality is that cybersecurity threats from you know who are as real a threat to your freedoms as whatever the us government is going to do with your private data. Sorting out the intersection of freedoms pulling in different directions is always hard.
(3a) That said, if we have to do something we can do a lot better then Lieberman/Collins and this Executive Order/PDD is a fundamentally worse proposition, no matter if it's more lenient in a few details, because these trade offs should to be done openly through the legislature.
(4) Romney's alternative energy plan is cold fusion.
I think it's mostly because true political change is messy. People are self-centered and if they are doing okay, they will prefer stability to revolution almost without fail, regardless of how rotten the system is or how many people it cheats and abuses. It's why the Sunni merchant class in Aleppo supported Assad just about to the point he started dropping bombs on their houses. Real change in America would mean short term strife and uncertainty, even if it vastly improves long term prospects, and there's always the risk that the attempt will fail and things will end up worse than before. That's not a trade that well-off people are historically keen to make, so they stick with the devils they know, quibbling over their relatively minor differences. Real change requires a desperation strong enough to break the seal on pandora's box through a willing rupture of the status quo.
Johnson looks very likely to be on all states' ballots in November (Michigan is the least likely, but still very possible) and Stein should be on the ballot in the majority of states.
Except for a few states (e.g., Colorado) it looks quite likely that any effect Johnson has will favor Obama's electoral prospects over Romney's, anyway.
And non presidential election turnout is abysmal.
I believe Obama's publicly stated position in 2008 was to set up this system: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr... and http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr... and http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr....
Hard to be a hypocrite and a liar when you follow through with your own policies. Not that I agree with this one though.